SWA TA fails

[AA767AV8TOR]

Great job LUV!!! You have just given the rest of us hope!!!
AA767AV8TOR

 

[SWA/FO]

You are right though SWAPA is all senior Captains except for a few guys. So they sold the junior guys down the river not just with the Lance program, but also with scheduling. Thank God enough senior guys had heartache with Codeshare and voted no, if not this thing would have passed. Age 65 split this group. The problem is not with SWA as much as it is with SWAPA and the senior guys who run it.

exactly....

 

[relief tube]

Being Rational 1, kool-aid 0

congrats fellas.

wish there was a such thing as a breakdown by age. Bet the 60+er's were 98% yes. f 'em

 

[fam62c]

It sounds like even if you can't get an acceptable deal anytime soon you might be better off with the contract you have now. If oil prices keep going up, costs keep rising because of no growth and the second quarter loss is high the proposed deal may not get any better but it sounds like what you already have now might be the best thing all things considered. Best of luck either way.

 

[chris69]

I agree with most of the NO sentiments on this board, actually tried to find everything I could positive in this TA, but it simply had too many flaws. The sales job was disappointingly one sided. Below is the compensation breakdown from SWAPA, which, from a senior FO perspective with a delayed upgrade, I thought was, in and of itself, not a reason to vote NO:
This is a quick summary of the value of the compensation package for four different representative pilots on our seniority list; senior/junior Captain and senior/junior F/O. Lance Captains (LC) were not addressed in this analysis due to significant individual variability with respect to the amount of Captain and F/O flying done. Data from the representative pilot analysis details the increases per month, per year, career and for the life of the contract for the representative pilots. The estimates are based on two levels of pay, 87 and 100 TFP. Typically we would use the average TFP of 110 which is the long term historical average. However, with reduced flying this year, we elected to use 87 and 100. The estimates will not be exact for your specific situation but should give you a good idea of what the compensation sections effect will be for you.


Estimated personal financial impact of the proposed tentative agreement…

Based on 100 TFP per MonthPilot ExamplesAgeTenureIncreaseMonthly RaiseYearly RaiseCareer Value (Up to Age 65)Retro * †Senior CA (#27,XXX)5512+6.12%$1,062$12,744$138,614$11,174Junior CA (#56,XXX)4686.12%$1,017$12,204$250,658$9,314Senior FO (#66,XXX) ¹4379.34%$1,013$12,156$294,804$6,936Junior FO (#91,XXX) ²2616.12%$281$3,372$487,612$1,860


Based on 87 TFP per MonthPilot ExamplesAgeTenureIncreaseMonthly RaiseYearly RaiseCareer Value (Up to Age 65)Retro * †Senior CA (#27,XXX)5512+6.12%$924$11,087$122,047$11,174Junior CA (#56,XXX)4686.12%$885$10,617$219,283$9,314Senior FO (#66,XXX) ¹4379.34%$881$10,576$257,381$6,936Junior FO (#91,XXX) ²2616.12%$244$2,934$424,464$1,860* Based on 100 TFP per Month
† 22 Months of Retro if Ratified on 03Jun
¹ Assumes CA upgrade at year 10
² Assumes CA upgrade at year 12

However, look at the disingenuous age assumption for the junior FO. We have a total of 23 pilots under 30 in the whole airline. The average new hire age, according to the old class lists was 37. Makes the career value number much less than that posted. Another simply shallow salesjob.

Still, just too many negatives for a YES vote. One of our senior DAL guys wrote a great letter that many of us signed, which I hope someone will post, which was spot on. We are already getting spun by the press for turning down raises in these tough times and I don't think there is an underpaid and envious reporter out there that would even try to understand our reasoning. Oh well.
C

 

[turbodriver]

At least you SWA guys have a pair big enough to say no to reduced scope......

 

[StopNTSing]

At least you SWA guys have a pair big enough to say no to reduced scope......

Thanks, but that remains to be seen. The next offer may be just the original TA warmed-over with some small enhancements to sway 100 or so pilots to a 'yes.'

 

[shearedshaft]

The "junior" pay example was for the most junior guy on the property. Check the seniority list. Why would picking as "junior" someone who was less junior be a better answer than picking the most junior guy?

As posted on another thread, this TA failure cost me $1,200 per month, and it cost every SWA fo on this board a similar, or lesser amount, but even at the most junior levels, you guys just gave up $600/month or so.

Senior FOs got a 10% raise, junior FOs got a 6% raise (make that 11% and 7% with the 401(k) bump) and you guys gave it up. Gone like a freight train. Gone like yesterday.

For a lot of you, that pay raise would have equaled a smaller mortgage payment. Gone like yesterday.

Think to yourselves..."I'm writing a check for $800 each month. Every month, I'm writing a check back to the company for $800".

Gone like a soldier in the civil war.

 

[Mach 80]

Very good. Montgomery/Gentry

 

[murano]

When we come back with 5% raises I want YOU to write ME a check for $1200 / month for voting NO on this turd.

 

[puddlejumper101]

The "junior" pay example was for the most junior guy on the property. Check the seniority list. Why would picking as "junior" someone who was less junior be a better answer than picking the most junior guy?

As posted on another thread, this TA failure cost me $1,200 per month, and it cost every SWA fo on this board a similar, or lesser amount, but even at the most junior levels, you guys just gave up $600/month or so.

Senior FOs got a 10% raise, junior FOs got a 6% raise (make that 11% and 7% with the 401(k) bump) and you guys gave it up. Gone like a freight train. Gone like yesterday.

For a lot of you, that pay raise would have equaled a smaller mortgage payment. Gone like yesterday.

Think to yourselves..."I'm writing a check for $800 each month. Every month, I'm writing a check back to the company for $800".

Gone like a soldier in the civil war.

wait a minute...as much as the numbers make sense, the scheduling changes and lack of flexibility for that junior F/O means he broke even. If you ask me I would gladly make those extra $600 with ELLIT flexibility and when I am willing to give the company an extra day. Now the company will just give me the $600 and force me to fly my line for the most part. If I need an extra day off, or move my trips because my kid has a doc app, then I am stuck and screwed. Most of us would rather have the QOL instead of the cash. We can always make the cash when we are ready. That's the beauty of what we have, it is called flexibility.

So they want me to give up my flexibility and they will pay me a set number up front for it. The question becomes how valuable is your time off? Can you put a number to it? Plus with VJA in 2 days I can double or triple those same $600 and it was when I could. Things that make you go hmm.. There is more to this than numbers and straight pay. Oh yeah, by the way the lance cap. gets $1200 for giving up his seat...That means he took a $25000 pay cut instead of a $30000 pay cut.

 

[GuppyWN]

The "junior" pay example was for the most junior guy on the property. Check the seniority list. Why would picking as "junior" someone who was less junior be a better answer than picking the most junior guy?

As posted on another thread, this TA failure cost me $1,200 per month, and it cost every SWA fo on this board a similar, or lesser amount, but even at the most junior levels, you guys just gave up $600/month or so.

Senior FOs got a 10% raise, junior FOs got a 6% raise (make that 11% and 7% with the 401(k) bump) and you guys gave it up. Gone like a freight train. Gone like yesterday.

For a lot of you, that pay raise would have equaled a smaller mortgage payment. Gone like yesterday.

Think to yourselves..."I'm writing a check for $800 each month. Every month, I'm writing a check back to the company for $800".

Gone like a soldier in the civil war.

SL32 requires the company to grow by 5% if they want to codeshare. There are no exceptions, no outs. The only out is to simply not abide.

You can have your 7% raise (not really after the reductions), I want job security.

Gup

 

[shearedshaft]

The ELITT argument is comical. Do you know what destroys ELITT? Lances and first year guys pounding on it like a redheaded step child, using it to lower their line totals. Have you noticed that net zero is always (always!) zero on the FO side, even with overmanning?

If you wanted flexibility, then restricting lances and first year guys from pounding on it would get your net zero up to a big positive number, like on the captain's side. Then you'd be able to really have a flexible schedule. Think what you could do with a net zero of 65, like over on the PHX CA side last month. That, my friend is flexibility.

I bet you also have zero idea how to even calculate DTC, but if you think that limiting the DTC net zero (downside) of ELITT is smarter than getting a net zero of 65 (upside) like the captains, than I think you should sit down with a paper and pencil and ask yourself, "Would I like to be able to open ELITT and see a net zero of 65 to move my schedule around, or would I like to open ELITT and see a DTC that is 1% higher on two weekends per month with net zeros still zero?" (Hint: you want a high net zero, but I bet you've never actually seen one so you don't know what you're missing)

Seriously? You don't see where the ELITT problems come from? Hint, it's not DTC, it's guys out of category hitting "trade" as soon as net zero goes to one. Who are those guys? Lances and first years trying to get rid of their lines. Those guys, my friend, are the ones who "limit" you, not DTC.

If you had a net zero of 65, then by definition, DTC wouldn't matter and affect your flexibility. You would have so much flexibility you could drop whole four day trips into the mix if you needed to. But now, we're at net zero for every FO ELITT across the system and we're at huge net zeros for every captain ELITT. How's that working out for you in terms of flexibility?

Oh and codeshare? Looks like the no vote just opened us up to unlimited domestic code share. Lets cross our fingers and hope SWA doesn't announce Republic going to Lubbock for us. We sure showed them with a no vote! Hey SWA, we want to make sure you can domestic code share with no restriction, so vote no!

 

[Capn Butthead]

Ummmmmm.........what?????

Im a 5 year f/o and im always on elitt looking for something better! I like having the option of moving my trips around and enjoying my days off! it take 3 minutes to log in check elitt, then logoff....God that was a waste of time! Not trying to offend you but I think you are out of touch on what is really going on with what most F/O's are doing. Scope is a big big deal and SL32 does address that better than the TA. Plus as I put on your other post....Sure we could add RJ's....But they dont make sense in a low cost enviroment. They cant compete with the Seat mile cost of a 737 or an A320. Period. With fuel prices rising they are even more so not cost effective.

 

[scoreboardII]

shershaft, are you really this clueless?

Really? When your sitting across the table from the manager at the car dealer, and you push that offer he just made back across the table and say, "no thanks, I still need the floor matt's", why do you think you then lose everything you have just been talking about for 2 hours? No you don't. You keep talking from that point.

SWA won't play hardball, they want this done more than us.